Group Read, March 2015: Dictionary of the Khazars

One of the more intriguing books on the 1001 list, Dictionary of the Khazars by Milorad Pavic is a supposed recreation of seventeenth century text regarding a lost tribe, the original texts having been destroyed during the Inquisition. The book is published in both a male and a female edition, with one paragraph being different between the two. Surely we'll find something to talk about here.....!!

I'm only about 10 pages into this but I have to say that it's maybe not the best book for me to read at a stressful time in the semester. It is way too much like the actual 16th and 17th century historical texts that I read for my research! It's hard to appreciate it as entertainment or even as a break from work.

I read about 50 pages of the female version this morning. The "history" of the book and the format (three books telling a history from the perspective of three religions) are certainly intriguing and I haven't quite made up my mind whether to read this as a novel or to skip between the cross-references. I'm struck with the similarities to Borges Labyrinths - a semi-believable historical world where time and space are somewhat warped. I'm enjoying it, but realise that it might not be the best book for a dozy morning train trip!

After 70 pages in the male version, it really feels like studying. I wonder if I want to know this much about the Khazars. If I really couldn't die without knowing them and this book.
Still, I have to admit it is intriguing. I am waiting for something to happen, I don't know what exactly. Probably in vain!

It's not so much that something happens, but when you read the three different versions of similar stores, the bigger picture is added to little by little. I enjoyed the retelling from different perspectives, from each of the different religions. The overarching story is what happened to the book that was lost, but you won't get to that until the end.

Had to give up on this for now, too much like work. Maybe later in the month....

I'm now coming to the end of the second (Muslim) book. I am seeing the same general story told by different authors, though I'm not really seeing it is being a particularly religious perspective. As a Christian, I didn't read the first book as being particularly Christian other than it involving monks and icons - there doesn't seem to be too much theology in the various retellings, just a shift in perspective of the three main players at the Khazar Polemic.

There are some entertaining stories in here, but there is more detail in the book than my brain can cope with . Every so often I think "haven't I read this before" and flick back through the book to find the earlier reference, but much of it is washing over me.

I finished the book today. A few concluding remarks:

The story, such as it is, does get pulled together in the final pages of the book (specifically the Appendices) with the key players all involved with each other - without this I would have remained somewhat baffled.

It's not really a spoiler to point out that it is the italicised paragraph on page 293 that is different between the male and the female versions of this book. The paragraphs can be compared on line (e.g. there is a linked footnote on the Wikipedia page for this book). I read the whole female version of the book, then went back and substituted the male paragraph and while I'm sure it would have been a notable difference if I'd remembered everything I'd read before, my brain was so overloaded that I couldn't be bothered trying to work out what the significance was.

In summary, I loved the concept behind the book, and I enjoyed some of the magic realism in the stories, but overall I found it had too much fragmented detail and couldn't really get excited about the mystery behind the Dictionary.

So, you all are reading from front to back? I think one of the reasons I enjoyed this books is that i accepted the invitation to read it in any order -- sort of like a choose your own adventure book. So I would read an entry and then skip to one of the other terms mentioned in the first entry, trying to see if I could make it all the way through the book following the references. It went something like: page 8, 103, 121, 9, 11 15, 191, 199, 276, 278, 299, 244.....

Although by this method, I probably had even less of an idea of "plot", but I may have gotten a better sense of the different perspectives around the same idea as the links led me straight from one to the mext without plodding through 100 pages in between.

Choose your own adventure books gave me anxiety as a child- I felt like I was always missing something. I know, this doesn't speak well for my mental health! I give you credit, Eliz_M, for taking the challenge to be unconventional!

Puckers, I feel like the mystery was definitely not prominent in anything but the very beginning and the very end. I wish it was played up a little more.

For me the biggest issue I had with the book was lack of motive.

SPOILER ALERT

The overarching plot as I understand it is that the materials for the Dictionary were brought together in the late 17th century, but an agent of "Satan" sought to destroy both the manuscripts and the individuals who sourced the material. Why? Thanks to the photographic memory of Father Nikolsky the Dictionary is published but most copies destroyed by the Inquisition. Why? In the 1980s the remaining materials are brought together at a conference but "Satan" seeks to destroy the materials and the individuals bringing them together. Again why?

For a mystery to work there should be some hint that there is something worthwhile discovering. The materials presented here didn't seem to have anything earthshattering or heretical in them. Pavic in his introduction states that the reader will struggle to understand the truth of the dictionary and "the rest is up to us" but I feel rather too much is left the reader's imagination and therefore the mystery fails to excite the imagination.

I started reading this yesterday and following on the permission given in the preface I am not reading it in the standard beginning to end format. I've taken to reading a section from each of the three books in turn which I think might help with remembering the variations between the 3; if I read them in sequential order I fear I'd forget everything by the time it came around again.

So far I find it extremely peculiar and not particularly engaging but this may change as I've only read a small amount.

Reading sections diagonally gave me an opportunity to skip through the book rather quickly. I read all entries which are in all books and some others which I thought relevant.
Then I turned to the appendices. They did clarify a bit what I was looking for, although I was not sure what I was looking for.
I agree with Puckers, too much is left for my imagination and I feel a bit unsatisfied. Then again, maybe I am not interested enough.

I've started to get into this more; I've been reading it more and more like a 'pick your own adventure book' by following a trail until I come across something which interests me and then I'll follow that. So far I'm picking up snatches from each of the three religions and I'm wondering just what the author is trying to say with this work? That all religions are the same (those 3 from 'the book' anyway)? That all religions lie or twist the facts? That all religions are full of s**t? Anyone got any thoughts?

I'm enjoying it, but dipping in rather than reading long stretches. I like the concept and overlap.

Just got the notice that my ILL copy has come is and is ready for pick up. However, the thought that reading cover-to-cover in order might not the best way to approach it is making me a bit anxious. I'll try to keep an open mind, though, and give myself permission to skip around. Can't wait to pick it up tomorrow and get a look at it for myself.

I finally finished the book today... this was definitely a book that I appreciated more than enjoyed. It felt a lot like work without a payoff in the end.

I read the female version and then read the male paragraph after clicking the link on Wikipedia. Not sure either paragraph really made a difference for me. Apparently, I didn't put enough into the book to get at the truth of it.